I was just contemplating this and I thought I'd ask your opinion. To say that you love someone "for who they are" would always be incorrect as all beings are empty of a self. So in that sense all romance is based on clinging to external (selfless) phenomenon such as form, perception, or feeling that arise in dependence with contact (either with sight, scent, sound, touch, etc). Thus romantic love is a conditioned feeling, impermanent, subject to clinging, and dependent upon certain external stimuli--not on any particular individual person. Would it follow then that saying you love someone (romantically) is a false statement?

If given that it's a conditional love, yes. But if you love them regardless of whether they're empty of a self or not then it's pure metta expressed in various ways. There's 2 kinds of love, there's attached conditional love, and unattached unconditional love. The latter is how most people ideally want their romantic relationships to be.

Moth wrote:Would it follow then that saying you love someone (romantically) is a false statement?

Even if all that were true, that is still your understanding of this world unless you're awakened. I'd say the greater lie would be if you said that loving someone was false while you still cling to self.

Still, choose your battles. You tell someone that you can't love them because they cling to a concept of self, and that will probably be a short relationship.

We are aware intellectually of the difference between Conventional and Ultimate truths. But unless we've reached one of the levels of enlightenment, it is all just theory. Live your life where you actually are.

with mettaChris

---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

I'll let others more knowledgable clarify the dynamics of the doctrines involved in this issue. For me, when I was first getting established in the Dhamma I had to come to terms (quite painfully) with how I totally screwed up a relationship. I had to honestly ask myself, 'Do I really know what it means to love someone else? Have I really just been caught up in a sense of self and was actually expecting someone else to give me affirmation for this projected sense of self--and mistaking all of that for 'love''? Learning about the following helped a lot:

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time King Pasenadi Kosala was together with Queen Mallika in the upper palace. Then he said to her, "Is there anyone more dear to you than yourself?"

"No, your majesty," she answered. "There is no one more dear to me than myself. And what about you, your majesty? Is there anyone more dear to you than yourself?"

"No, Mallika. There is no one more dear to me than myself."

Then the king, descending from the palace, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Just now I was together with Queen Mallika in the upper palace. I said to her, 'Is there anyone more dear to you than yourself?'

"'No, your majesty,' she answered. 'There is no one more dear to me than myself. And what about you, your majesty? Is there anyone more dear to you than yourself?'

"'No, Mallika. There is no one more dear to me than myself.'"

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:

Searching all directionswith one's awareness,one finds no one dearerthan oneself.In the same way, othersare fiercely dear to themselves.So one should not hurt othersif one loves oneself.

Moth, I agree whole heartily with your assessment of 'love'.Also I believe all romance ends in tears, even the greatest ones.When two people fall in love, two things will happen.1. One of them will fall out of love.2. One of them will die sooner or later.All romance ends in misery/suffering.Metta.

Moth wrote:I was just contemplating this and I thought I'd ask your opinion. To say that you love someone "for who they are" would always be incorrect as all beings are empty of a self. So in that sense all romance is based on clinging to external (selfless) phenomenon such as form, perception, or feeling that arise in dependence with contact (either with sight, scent, sound, touch, etc). Thus romantic love is a conditioned feeling, impermanent, subject to clinging, and dependent upon certain external stimuli--not on any particular individual person.

I would say "You love someone (romantically) due to the love you feel based on the way they are appearing to you."

Moth wrote:Would it follow then that saying you love someone (romantically) is a false statement?

That's why the wise of old and even now.....all go forth to the homeless life and practice meditation. There is no higher bliss than Nibbana.If not, follow conventional reality and be your best in efforts to be a good husband, good wife, good child, good father, good mother etc etc.In a relationship, there can be gain as well. Husband and wife can help each other in practice and collecting parami. It's not that we think it's anatta and poof its all false. We have to know it is false. And yes finally it's all false.

Moth wrote:I was just contemplating this and I thought I'd ask your opinion. To say that you love someone "for who they are" would always be incorrect as all beings are empty of a self. So in that sense all romance is based on clinging to external (selfless) phenomenon such as form, perception, or feeling that arise in dependence with contact (either with sight, scent, sound, touch, etc). Thus romantic love is a conditioned feeling, impermanent, subject to clinging, and dependent upon certain external stimuli--not on any particular individual person. Would it follow then that saying you love someone (romantically) is a false statement?

yes. however, when it is seen that all phenomena is empty of self the love he feels is deeper and no longer for only one person.. the expression of this love may be romantic.